The fast-track regime continues to attract both support and criticism.
Minister Shane Jones has advocated for a more aggressive use of the process. Environmental groups and opposition parties warn that the regime limits community and environmental oversight. The New Zealand Labour Party has signalled intentions to repeal or significantly amend the Act if returned to government.
Proposed amendments to the Fast-track Approvals Act
In response to early experience with the regime, Minister Bishop has announced that an amendment bill will be introduced in November 2025 to increase efficiency. The proposed changes aim to reduce paperwork and accelerate approvals, and are expected to expand eligibility to include new supermarkets that enhance grocery competition. In addition, Minister Bishop has indicated that the amendments will “sort” the issue that caused the Port of Tauranga’s expansion plan to be halted by a judicial review (as discussed below), and Minister Jones has indicated amendments to the fast-track process targeted at limiting which parties can be invited into the proceedings.
It is possible we could also see amendments focused on some of the issues identified below that have affected the speed of the process, such as enabling applicants to provide supplementary information post-lodgement to address completeness issues, or amendments to section 79 regarding decision-making time frames.
Pipeline of fast-tracked projects
At the time of writing, 20 projects are categorised as being ‘in progress’ on the Fast-track Approvals Act (FTAA) website. One project (Sunfield) is currently suspended, and one project (Delmore) has been withdrawn.
Approvals have been granted for Auckland’s Bledisloe North Wharf extension and the Maitahi Village project in Nelson, and decisions on at least eight more are anticipated before the end of the year (subject to any suspensions), including:
- Milldale (Fulton Hogan Land Development Ltd) – Stages 4C and 10 to 13 – Earthworks and site work for approximately 1,100 residential allotments. A draft decision granting approvals has been released, with the final decision due on 7 October 2025.
- Drury Metropolitan Centre – Consolidated Stages 1 and 2 (Kiwi Property Holdings No. 2 Limited) – Development of land for future residential activity and a commercial retail centre (including, approximately, 10,000 square metres commercial, 56,000 square metres retail, and 2,000 square metres community activity).
- Drury Quarry Expansion – Sutton Block (Stevenson Aggregates Limited) – In stages, development of a quarry with a maximum pit depth of 60 metres over a 50-year period, to be serviced using existing infrastructure and facilities.
- Waihi North (OceanaGold (New Zealand) Limited) – In stages, expansion of the existing gold and silver mining operations, including establishment of new open pit and underground mines, and extension of the life of the mine from expiry in 2030 to 2040.
- Ryans Road Industrial Development (Carter Group Limited) – An industrial subdivision and development project near Christchurch Airport.
- Kings Quarry Expansion – Stages 2 and 3 (Kings Quarry Limited) – Expansion of existing quarrying activities to enable the extraction and processing of up to approximately 500,000 tonnes per annum for up to 100 years (up to 60 years for Stage 2 and up to 40 years for Stage 3).
- Tekapo Power Scheme – Applications for Replacement Resource Consents (Genesis Energy Limited) – Enabling the continued use, operation, and maintenance of the power scheme comprising Tekapo A Power Station and substation, Tekapo B Power Station and substation, and the canal system, and connection and supply of electricity to the national grid.
- Rangitoopuni (Rangitoopuni Developments Limited) – Subdivision and development of approximately 210 residential allotments and an approximately 350-unit retirement village.
Early roadblocks and reflections
Returned applications
In our August update, we noted that four applications to be referred for fast-track consenting had been declined due to failure to meet statutory requirements. At the time of writing, six referral projects have now been returned to applicants due to being incomplete or non-compliant with the FTAA, and six substantive applications have been returned for failure to meet the Act’s completeness and scope requirements, with applicants required to remedy and re-lodge.
It seems unlikely the Government envisaged that projects eligible for acceleration would stumble early in the fast-track process. The experience to date indicates high information thresholds proving more exacting than anticipated, thereby extending timelines rather than compressing them.
Declined referrals
Two referral applications have been declined by the Minister of Infrastructure. The Minister declined to refer the Powerhouse Funicular Railways Queenstown Regional Development project to the fast track due to a lack of sufficient detail. Without sufficient detail, the Minister was not satisfied that the project would deliver significant regional or national benefits, nor that referring the project would be unlikely to affect the efficient operation of the fast-track approvals process.
The Minister also declined to refer the Hobsonville Retirement Village project on the basis that the project did not have the necessary approvals to lawfully proceed. In the absence of these approvals, the Minister was not satisfied that the project would deliver significant regional or national benefits. The Minister was also not satisfied that referring the project would be unlikely to affect the efficient operation of the fast-track approvals process, nor would it facilitate the project including by enabling it to be processed in a more timely and cost-effective way than under normal processes.
Declined substantive applications
The Delmore project, a listed project seeking approvals for a residential subdivision and roading interchange at Orewa, was withdrawn earlier this month following the Panel’s release of a draft decision to decline the approvals sought. The applicant has indicated its intention to relodge a fresh application in the future. With limited grounds to decline a decision, it was unexpected that we would see the decline of a listed project so early in the FTAA’s lifetime.
Successful judicial review
The Port of Tauranga has also faced a roadblock following the successful judicial review of its fast-track application for the Stella Passage development, with the High Court determining that the Environmental Protection Authority should not have accepted the Port’s application as the project was not as described in schedule 2 of the legislation and directing that no further work be undertaken on the project under the FTAA process.
Extended decision-making time frames
To date, no approved or in-progress project has been granted the default decision making time of 30 working days after comments from invited parties are received. The shortest time frame set so far is 37 working days for the Kings Quarry Expansion project, with the longest timeframe being 100 working days for the Taranaki VTM project. Most applications to date have been allocated ≥ 60 working days following receipt of invited comments, that is at least double the statutory default.
Broad invitations to comment
Section 53(3) of the FTAA provides panels with a broad discretion to invite comments from any other person they consider appropriate. Panels exercising this discretion have adopted a range of approaches, resulting in differing outcomes.
In its decision on the Bledisloe North Wharf and Fergusson North Berth Extension project, the Panel acknowledged that despite section 53(3) conferring an apparently unfettered discretion on a Panel, any exercise of a statutory discretion must be undertaken in a principled manner consistent with the purpose of the legislation conferring that discretion. It used statutory interpretation principles to assess the purpose of the FTAA, and the procedural principles set out, which focus on timely, efficient, consistent and cost-effective processes that are proportionate and best promote the just and timely determination of approvals sought.
The Panel acknowledged the lack of any requirement to notify the application, that a hearing is not required under the FTAA, that no person has a right to be heard, and the tight timeframes for decisions and limited rights of appeal. Applying a set of principles to its analysis, the Panel concluded that the application material together with the wide range of entities from whom comment must be invited would ensure that the Panel could make a robust, fully informed decision within the timeframe required by the FTAA.
In contrast, the decision of the Panel deciding the Taranaki VTM application, a seabed mining project, invited 40 entities to comment without providing reasons for this decision, including environmental organisations, fishing charter and seafood companies, and iwi/hapū groups.
Other panels have applied articulated principle-based frameworks, distinct from that used in the Bledisloe North Wharf and Fergusson North Berth Extension decision (e.g., Ryans Road Industrial Area, Sunfield, Tekapo Power Scheme), while others have taken an effects-focused approach (e.g., Rangitoopuni, Waihi North). In Milldale, the Panel invited comments from parties the applicant had consulted. In several matters, unsolicited correspondence to the EPA/Panels appears to have been a catalyst for invitations to comment (e.g., Taranaki VTM, Sunfield, Maitahi Village, Tekapo Power Scheme).
Fast-track: the road ahead
Early implementation has revealed high completeness thresholds, variable practices in relation to invitations to comment, longer decision time frames, and vulnerability to legal challenge. The Government’s flagged amendments are likely to address some of these matters.
We will continue to monitor these developments closely, as the regime’s scope and processes continue to evolve.
If you have any questions about this article, please get in touch with the contacts listed or your usual Bell Gully adviser.
Disclaimer: This publication is necessarily brief and general in nature. You should seek professional advice before taking any action in relation to the matters dealt with in this publication.
